Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role

[Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1365 bytes --]


28.2.2006, 18:11:57, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:02:11 +0000 Renat Lumpau <rl03@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:35:32PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| >> Ebuilds can't override this either. Read on in the eclass and you'll
| >> notice that it checks that SLOT hasn't been changed to something
| >> sane.
> | 
> | Excepting that you can set WEBAPP_MANUAL_SLOT="yes" and set SLOT to
> | whatever the hell you want. But don't let my facts get in the way of
> | your nonsense.

> And it sticks out a nasty ewarn and says that the ebuild is probably
> broken.

> Again, you're dismissing QA issues as nonsense, and you wonder why I
> don't waste my time doing a full audit.

Ah, so this is the horrible and nasty ewarn?

<snip>
ewarn "This ebuild overrides the default SLOT behaviour for webapps"
ewarn "If this package installs files into the htdocs dir, this is"
ewarn "probably a bug in the ebuild."
</snip>

Sigh... what kind of QA issue is that? Go file bugs about those nasty QA
notices portage spits out every now and then as well, if you are so
concerned about warnings. Indeed, please don't waste your time and first of
all don't waste ours. Go audit whatever you want, but please keep this
off-list. Or maybe don't stare on the screen if ewarns scare you that much.
;)


-- 

jakub

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 183 bytes --]